See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309626131

A methodology based on GIS for 3D Slope Stability Analysis

Article  in  International Journal of Engineering and Technology · October 2016

DOI: 10.21817/ijet/2016/v8i5/160805061

CITATIONS READS

4 527

4 authors:

Bouajaj Ahmed Lahcen Bahi

Mohammadia School of Engineers Mohammadia School of Engineers
4 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    162 PUBLICATIONS   551 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ouadif Latifa Khadija Baba

Mohammadia School of Engineers Mohammed V University of Rabat
107 PUBLICATIONS   321 CITATIONS    63 PUBLICATIONS   249 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Contribution of geophysics for the characterization of ore deposits, case of the Bouarfa mine View project

Kaoutar ouatiki View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ouadif Latifa on 05 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

Prrobabiilistic apprroach for th

he seleection
n of
t sh
the hallow w founndatio
on’s saafety ffactorr
M. Mounji#11, A. Lahmilii *2, L. Ouadiif *3, K. Babaa *4, L. Bahi *5
#
3GIE Labboratory, Mohhammadia Eng gineering Schoool (E.M.I),
M
Mohammed – V University, Rabat,
R Moroccco.
1
mounjiimehdi25@gm mail.com
2
a.laahmili@gmaill.com
3
ouuadif@gmail.ccom
4
baba..khadija@gmaail.com
5
b
bahi@emi.ac.mma
Abstraact— In this paper, we prresent a new approach fo or estimating the risk of fo foundation’s failure of
which th he design wass made using the conventiional safety factor. f We alsso present the results of numerical
n
simulatioons applied to a continu uous spread footing foun ndation based d on a grain ny dry soil where
w the
geotechn nical characteeristics are a random spattial variabless. Indeed, we show that foor the soil wh hich has a
high nattural variabiility the prob bability of faailure associa ated with the standard ssafety factor becomes
importan nt then, in th
his case, a goood choice of thhe safety facttor is necessary.
Keyword- Shallow foundations, Safety factor,, Natural soil’s variability, Risk R of failuree, Probabilisticc method.
I. INTRODUCTIION
Since the middle of the last century, geootechnical en ngineering deevelopments pplaces the control c of
geotechnnical risks as a priority. Som me authors illuustrate this deesire [1, 2, 3, 4 and 5]. In pparallel, the co
omplexity
of projeccts, through thhe goals "costt / time / perfformance", is increasing annd the lands cchosen to receeive them
have, in the
t majority of o cases, difficcult geotechniical conditions. These unfavorable condiitions could reesult from
a high vaariability of sooil properties and could maake their reco ognition and analysis
a very ccomplex whicch may be
the sourcce of further damage
d as shown in Fig.1.1. Our research h work fall unnder the geotecchnical risk co ontrol and
it focus on
o the questioon of the naturral soil variabbility effects on
o the stabilityy of shallow ffoundations. OurO works
are basedd on the appliccation of probability and staatistics theoriees to assess annd quantify thoose effects.

Fig.1.1. Illustrration of the foundations’s failure

The fiirst reflectionss on the applicability of prrobabilities an

nd statistics in the geotechhnical engineeering date
from thee year 1960. At that time the focus was w on the relationship bettween parameeters analysiss, what is
commonlly called the study
s of correelations with the
t objective tot facilitate geeotechnical sttudies for the structures
designingg. Various staatistical analyzzes were undeertaken at thatt time, some results
r can be found in the articles
a of
Amar, Bagulin and Jéézéquel [6, 7] and in the works w of Magn nan and Baghhery [8, 9, 10,, 11 and 12] anda in the
research report of Vidaalie [13].

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1329

e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

II. METHODOLO OGY

The caalculation of the
t bearing caapacity of shalllow foundatioons from coheesion and internal friction coefficient
c
is amongg the most welll – known prooblem of the soil mechaniccs and all mannuals make exxtensive refereences. The
work of Bowles,
B Frankk, Hansen, Magnan, Meyrhhof, Genevois and Versic [114, 15, 16, 177, 18, 19 20 an nd 21] are
good exaamples. For esstimating the bearing
b capaciity, we generaally use the following formuula:
= 1 0
0,4 Ø Ø 1 0,2 1 0,2 Ø
As meentioned, the study
s focuses on the continnuous spread footing founddations based on a dry pow
wdery soil.
In this caase we have:
= Ø
The feew published studies on thiis subject (Maagnan and Baaghery [8, 9, 10, 11 and 122]) had shown n that it is
essential to take into account
a the sccales of soil vaariability if we
w want to maake a realistic estimating. In ndeed, the
probabiliities obtained are much tooo high to be reealistic (about 30%). In thiis work we prropose a new approach
for the caalculating of the
t foundationns failure probbability. Basin ng on the expploitation of thhe analytical properties
p
of the beearing capacitty coefficientts (Fig.2.1), ouro method, as a we will illlustrate in thee next section ns, reduce
significanntly the discoordance betweeen the estim mated failure probabilities
p a the realisttic failure pro
and obabilities
without tacking
t in accoount the scalees of soil propeerties variability.

Fig.22.1 Curves of the coefficient of bearing

b capacity Ø

Fig.2.11 shows that varies conntinuously (in the analyticall sense) with Ø and followiing a strictly increasing
i
monotonnicity which means
m that is a bijection. Then the fou
undation failuure condition ccould be transslated this
way:
∗
= Probability
P [ ].
Where,
∗
: Reall bearing capaacity.
: Estim
mated bearingg capacity
Fs : Safetty factor whicch is in generaal equal to 3
Then,
∗
∗
F = Probabillity Q N Ø∗ N Ø
So,
∗ Ø
F =P[Q < ] = P [ γ∗ N (Ø
( ∗) < ]
If we notte "e" as a nonnzero real num
mber, we obtaiin:
F = lim → P γ∗ P N Ø∗ N Ø S e
Where,
S(e) = ∑ P γ∗ P N Ø∗ k N Ø P N Ø∗ k 1 N Ø
.

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1330

e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

Let’s define "Ø " such as:

N (Ø )=k N Ø
Then we obtain the final formula for the failure probability
F = lim → P γ∗ P Ø∗ Ø S e
Where,
S(e) = ∑∞ P γ∗ P Ø∗ Ø P Ø∗ Ø
.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

In this section, we visualize the numerical simulations results for the failure probabilities calculations.
A. Results
Fig.3.1 shows the non linear increasing of the failure probability related to and also her insensitivity
according to the variability of the soil density. In the other hand, as we said before, the values of failure
probabilities obtained are more realistic than those obtained using the older methods. This difference between
results can be explained by the fact that in our approach we didn’t assume hypothesis concerning the distribution
of the values of Ø).

Fig.3.1 Curves representing the failure probability as a function of and for different values of Ø ,

In the other hand, Fig.3.2 shows that the failure probability follows a convex curves as a function of the
average value Ø . We also note that the failure probability admits, independently of and , the same
minimum value in Ø = 25˚.

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1331

e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

Fig.3.2. Curves
C representiing the failure proobability as a funcction of Ø and for different values of

Fig.3.33 gives, for diifferent valuess of , the currves representting the failuree probability aas a function of
o Ø .

18.00%
%
16.00%
% σ1 = 2
14.00%
%
12.00%
% σ1 = 3
10.00%
%
σ1 = 4
8.00%
%
6.00%
%
σ1 = 5
4.00%
%
2.00%
% σ1 = 6
0.00%
%
10◦ 1
15◦ 20◦ 25◦ 30◦ 35◦ 40◦ 45◦

Fig.3.33. Curves representing the failuree probability as a function of Ø for

f different valuees of

B. Discuussions
Resultts show that the failure prrobability deppends on the level of soil variability inn particular th
hat of the
internal friction
f coefficcient Ø. We have :
 For soils withh low variabillity, the choicce of safety factor
fa Fs is juustified by thee fact that the failure is
improbable.
 For soils withh medium varriability, the failure
fa probabiility takes vallues which, deepending on Ø , varies
from 0 to 5%. This correspponds to a relaatively low risk
k of failure.
 For soils withh high variabillity, the risk of
o failure beco
omes importannt with valuess of approximaately 10 –
20% and therefore the safety factor Fs = 3 is not adaptted to this situuation.

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1332

e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

TABLE I. ABSTRACT FOR THE RESULTS

Soil with Failure Probability Comments

Low Variability 0% Improbable Failure
Medium Variability About 5 % Moderate Probability
High Variability About 10 to 20 % High Probability

The fact that the failure probability has a minimum in Ø = 25˚ can be seen as a consequence of the variations
mode of the bearing capacity coefficient Ø). In fact, as illustrated by Fig.2.1, for Ø ≥ 25˚, the monotoncity of
Ø) becomes more and more pronounced (positive acceleration). That means, for a small decreasing ΔØ
corresponds a big drop Δ , which logically increases the value of the failure probability. On the other hand, for
the values Ø ≤ 25˚, the failure probability grows, despite small variations of in this area of values, which can
be justified by the ratio between Ø and σ , which, becoming very important in this area of values, increases the
values of the failure probability. So for Ø = 25˚, all favorable conditions come together to give low values to the
failure probability.
IV. CONCLUSION
The method presented provided realistic estimates of the risk of foundations failure and shows the interest of
taken into account the levels of the natural soil variability in the selection of safety factors especially in the case
of soils with high natural variability. Therefore, this method can be integrated in the foundation design process
in order to control the geotechnical risks and uncertainties.
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank Pr. Lahssan Bahi, Pr. Latifa Ouadif and Pr. Abdelaziz Lahmilli for providing
him with useful references and pointing out incorrect citations in an earlier draft.
REFERENCES
[1] Tbatou. T, Rougui. M., El youbi. M, (2014), The deterministic assessment of the effect of the soil-structure interaction on a vulnerable
impact of a reinforced concrete building | L'évaluation déterministe de l'effet de l'intéraction sol-structure sur l'impact vulnérabiliste
d'un bâtiment en béton armé, Journal of Materials and Environmental Science 5 (6), pp. 1951
[2] Baba.K, Bahi.L, Ouadif.L, Akhssas.A, (2012), Slope Stability Evaluations by Limit Equilibrium and Finite Element Methods Applied
to a Railway in the Moroccan Rif, Open Journal of Civil Engineering, 2 (01), pp 27-32
[3] Nehab. N, Baba. K, Ouadif. L, Cherradi. C, Bahi. L, (2014), Soft soil strengthening by stone columns: case of the embankment under
the bridge “Moulay Youssef”(Rabat/Salé) http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20141102012
[4] Ouadif. L, Bahi. L, Baba. K, Akhssas. A, (2012), Study of Stability of a Highway Fill Application of the Analytical and the Finite
Elements Methods, International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) Vol. 2, Issue 1, Jan-Feb 2012, pp. 904-
910
[5] Akhssas. A, Bahi. L, Lahmili. A, Ouaif. L, (2011), Study of the stability of rock slope, Canadian Journal on Scientific and Industrial
Research 2 (2), pp. 35-39.
[6] Amar. S, Baguelin. F, Jezequel J. – F. (1973), Utilisation des corrélations. Documents de la Table ronde sur les corrélations des
paramètres en mécanique des sols. École centrale des Arts et Manufactures, Paris, pp. 1 – 39 à 1 – 44.
[7] Amar. S, Jezequel J. – F. (1972), Essais en place et en laboratoire sur sols cohérents. Comparaisons des résultats. Bull, liaison Labo. P.
et Ch., Paris, 58, 12 pages.
[8] Magnan J.-P., Baghery S. ( 1982b), Statistiques et probabilités en mécanique des sols. Etat des connaissances. Laboratoire Central des
Ponts et Chaussées, Rapport de recherche LPC, 109, 187 pages.
[9] Magnan J - P. ( 1986), Approche probabiliste du calcul des fondations. Comptes rendus, Séminaire CLAROM « Approche probabiliste
et applications aux ouvrages en mer», Pau, oct., 13 pages.
[10] Magnan J - P. (1982), Les méthodes statistiques et probabilistes en mécanique des sols. Presses de l'École Nationale des Ponts et
Chaussées, Paris, 203 pages.
[11] Magnan J - P. (1988), Place des analyses probabilistes dans la pratique des projets de géotechnique. Comptes rendus, Symposium sur
la conception des ouvrages de génie civil basée sur la fiabilité (Symposium on reliability – based design in civil engineering), École
Polytechnique Fédérale, Lausanne, pp. 303 – 310.
[12] Magnan J - P. (1989), Variabilité des propriétés des sols et dimensionnement des ouvrages. Comptes rendus, 12ieme Congrès
international de Mécanique des sols et des travaux de fondations. Rio-de-Janeiro, vol. 2, pp. 853 – 854.
[13] Vidalie J – F. (1977), Relation entre les propriétés physico – chimiques et les caractéristiques mécaniques des sols compressibles.
Laboratoire central des Ponts et Chaussées, Paris, Rapport de recherche LPC, 65.
[14] Bowels J – E. (1996) . Foundation Analysis and Design. 5ieme Ed, Mc Graw – Hill book Company, New York.
[15] Frank. R. (1999). Calcule des fondations superficielles et profondes. Presse de l’Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, Paris.
[16] Hansen J – B (1970). A Revised and Extended Formula for Bearing Capacity. Danish Geotechnical Institute. Bulletin No. 28, p21.
[17] Meyerhof G – G.(1951). The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Fondations. Geotechnique, 2(4) : 301 – 332.
[18] Meyerhof G – G. (1965). Shallow Foundation ASCE J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., 91 (SM2) : 21 – 31.
[19] Versic A - S. (1973). Analysis of Ultimate Loads of Shallow Foundations ASCEJ.
[20] Magnan J – P. – Résistance au cisaillement. C 216 (1991). Traité Construction, volume C 2I.
[21] Genevois B. (1984), Rôle de la variabilité spatiale des paramètres de sol sur la capacité portante des fondations superficielles. Thèse de
Docteur – ingénieur, École centrale des Arts et Manufactures, Chatenay-Malabry, 144 pages.

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1333

 e-ISSN : 0975-4024 M. Mounji et al. / International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET)

AUTHOR PROFILE
Eng. Mehdi MOUNJI Geotechnical Engineer, PhD Student, Mohammadia Engineering School (E.M.I),
Mohammed – V University, Rabat, Morocco.
Pr. Abdelaziz LAHMILI PhD Professor of Geotechnical Engineering, Mohammadia Engineering School
(E.M.I), Mohammed – V University, Rabat, Morocco.
Pr. Latifa OUADIF PhD Professor of Geotechnical Engineering, Mohammadia Engineering School
(E.M.I), Mohammed – V University, Rabat, Morocco.
Pr. Khadija BABA PhD Professor of Civil Engineering Mohammadia Engineering School (E.M.I),
Mohammed – V University, Rabat, Morocco.
Pr Lahssan BAHI Director of the Doctoral Center and PhD Professor of Geophysics, Mohammadia
Engineering School (E.M.I), Mohammed – V University, Rabat, Morocco.

p-ISSN : 2319-8613 Vol 8 No 2 Apr-May 2016 1334

View publication stats